Mass. law about to take effect - some interesting points

[James]

I love the smell of totalitarianism in the morning. But anyway...

Yes and it always comes in the flavor of what is best for everyone. Who was it that coined the term "Two Chickens in every Pot" or a Car in every garage (that was the promise of the VW Bug), oh yea that was Hitler. People will always follow blind dumb and happy to the slaughter. All in the name of what is best for the society at large.

 

[www.SimpleHealthQuote.com]

I've been thinking about this more and have decided that force is not a good idea. What gives the government the right to decide what I do with my own body?

Also the underlying problem of what has caused health care to rise is not being addressed in Massachusettes. People don't shop for good deals when they have a copay low deductible insurance plan. That causes artificailly high demand.

The government should have never offered any incentives to businesses that offer health insurance. I don't think a plan should offer tax incentives unless it is a catastrophic plan with a very high deductible. Anything more is just messing up the effectiveness of the free market.

 

[James]

I've been thinking about this more and have decided that force is not a good idea. What gives the government the right to decide what I do with my own body?

Also the underlying problem of what has caused health care to rise is not being addressed in Massachusettes. People don't shop for good deals when they have a copay low deductible insurance plan. That causes artificailly high demand.

The government should have never offered any incentives to businesses that offer health insurance. I don't think a plan should offer tax incentives unless it is a catastrophic plan with a very high deductible. Anything more is just messing up the effectiveness in the free market.

What a lot of people miss in this entire argument is the relationship of the large Corporation and Government. There is no doubt large Corporation and the US Government created this problem. One can always blame the poor person that abuses the ER room and feel as though they are contributing to the solution by attacking them only on the other hand making the problem worse by supporting this kind of insanity.

As far as I'm concern and this is my personal political side talking. People that support what Mass. is promoting along with those in Mass and other States supporting similiar agenda is that they are nothing more than what some call the "5th Column" of American Society.

 

[Michael Haislip]

I've been thinking about this more and have decided that force is not a good idea. What gives the government the right to decide what I do with my own body?

Nothing gives them the authority to do so. If you can't own your body, then you own nothing. Might as well grovel at their feet.

What this mandatory health insurance issue boils down to is: government should have never gotten into health care, and now it's in over its head and looking to pass the buck without giving up the one thing it loves: control of people's lives.

It's like a protection racket, where Vito comes around weekly to collect. You can't tell Vito no, because Vito will break your kneecaps. "It's for your own good. Now pay up, sucker."

 

[Crabcake Johnny]

There is already horrible consequences to not being covered. Go get diagnosed with stage 1 lymphoma and not have insurance. It's not an emergency or life threatening so no hospital or provider has to treat you. And no one will. What will happen is when the condition gets bad enough you'll lose all your assets and go onto Medicaid. The problem is people simply, for obvious reasons, don't think about that.

The state's major complaint is they absorb a portion of health costs by uncovered people who have the means to pay for health insurance.

But then why the arguement? Why are the states paying a dime for someone who's uninsured and has assets? Foreclose on their home, garnish their wages and put 'em in the poor house. Then health insurance can still be an option but there could also be dire consequences that make people think twice about not opting for it.

 

[James]

Now comes the scare tactics John?

Let's look at the two main states leading this crap up, Mass. and Cal.. Wow two most liberal states of the Union and both have laws that are creating a exit strategy from their States by small business and their younger population.

Yet that is fine, I'm sure other States will be there to catch the mass exit of younger people and businesses fleeing these States. I know Arizona and Nevada is booming with the fleeing of businesses and people out of California. I suppose some in California are thinking only if they had some kind of Universal H/C that some how that would be a draw to bring people and buisnesses back to their State?

 

[Crabcake Johnny]

No scare tactics needed. The reality now is if you're not covered and have major expenses you're looking at BK. That's scary - yet not scary enough to get people to buy coverage.

Look at the penalities for not having auto. It's called jail time. And even jail time isn't enough to get people to have auto insurance. Go do some research; as high at 30% of all drivers without coverage in some states.

Who is the LIVING HELL authorized people to do possible jail time for failing to have auto insurance. In MD if you're caught without it you can't even pay a fine. It's a mandatory appear in front of a judge. I guess if you really want people to be covered you need very stiff consequences.

 

[James]

No scare tactics needed. The reality now is if you're not covered and have major expenses you're looking at BK. That's scary - yet not scary enough to get people to buy coverage.

Yet what concern is it of yours or any State? That is where I'm coming from, if one doesn't want coverage and is willing to risk BK than so be it, its called FREEDOM.

I could support something like this, have a partnership type of program. If you are insured (group coverage would be outlawed) under a certain criteria and those that fall under poverty, not 100 or 300% over poverty just the impoverished with dependent children or some sort of physical or mental handicap would have their premium paid for by the State. For everyone else they would need to have some form of crediable coverage if not they will never be given Medicare or Medicaid or any financial assistance by the government.

Make it a HD with a 1-3 million lifetime max. Plus you would have to have some sort of guarantee that the Insurance Carrier could not drop them if they implement some sort of preventative care such as regular physicals, or have some sort of WL Health Coverage type of plan developed by the insurance carriers.

 

[Crabcake Johnny]

But Mass. is claiming the state picks up part of the funds for hospital and doctors bills:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/04/AR2006040401937.html

Romney said the bill, modeled on the state's policy of requiring auto insurance, is intended to end an era in which 550,000 people go without insurance and their hospital and doctor visits are paid for in part with public funds.

 

[James]

But Mass. is claiming the state picks up part of the funds for hospital and doctors bills:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/04/AR2006040401937.html

Romney said the bill, modeled on the state's policy of requiring auto insurance, is intended to end an era in which 550,000 people go without insurance and their hospital and doctor visits are paid for in part with public funds.

I do not care, the State should just stop funding it, if not so be it. It does not give the State the right to mandate otherwise Unconstutional requirements to individuals. Let them to what business do, let them go after the people creating the cost.

Democrats will never ever support Gov. Bredeson of TN for higher office because he dealt with TNCare in a most common sense way, kick the freeloaders off the rolls that was creating the problem. Republicans (conservative base) will never support Gov. Romney because of this, yet the media and liberals will attack us because they'll say the only reason he didn't get the Conservative base support is becuase of his religion.